The chap pictured upthread far exceeds what I saw or had seen reported in the Dermatologic literature. In the video on him linked upthread blue guy said he'd been rubbing it on his chronic dermatitis in addition to drinking it. Maybe that accounts for the impressive color, he may be more like a silver tattoo. There have been a few reports of localized argyria, the technical term for silver in the skin, occurring after traumatic implantation of silver or silver compounds.
There's been some discussion of semantics upthread. Silver is certainly a metal and it certainly is heavy (as opposed to metals like aluminum.) It doesn't appear to be as toxic as some of the other "heavy metals" like arsenic, lead or thallium. For many things, including at least some heavy metals, positive effects and toxicity are dose related. Arsenic used to be used for many conditions and clearly helped some, but had a poor safety margin and was mostly replaced by newer treatments in the 50s. Gold used to be used a lot for rheumatoid arthritis and was virtually the medical gold standard for that until newer, better, treatments arrived. You did have to monitor for side effects. For those interested, the corresponding term for gold discoloring the skin is chrysiasis. It's subtle, but could be seen in long term users.
Other than skin discoloration I'm not expert on what the risks, if any, of long term silver treatment are. I'm a skeptic as to what benefits, if any, it may offer but realize its believers are not few - just the number of ads I've seen promoting it in Human Events proves that. For common ailments, for which conventional medicine hasn't yet found satisfactory fixes, sufferers will try just about anything regardless of its 'scientific merit' or lack thereof. Living in the birthplace of Chiropractic and having Dungheap Harkin, the leading DC proponent of 'complimentary medicine,' as my Senator has proven that beyond any doubt. For most such, I have as much faith in them as I have in anything else that exits Harkin's mouth. However I don't expect to be rid of them until science has developed clearly superior alternatives as it eventually did for arsenic and gold therapy.
That is not semantics it is science.
What is a heavy metal? It depends on who you ask!
According to Chemistry International Vol 23, No.6 November 2001 - "Heavy Metals" - A Meaningless Term
Def 1.) A generalized definition in common use: One of 23 chemical elements that has a specific gravity (a measure of density) at least five times that of water. Def 2.) Definition according to OSHA - The term "Heavy Metals" is generally interpreted to include those metals from periodic table groups IIA through VIA. The semi-metallic elements boron, arsenic, selenium, and tellurium are often included in this classification. At trace levels, many of these elements are necessary to support life. However, at elevated levels they become toxic, may build up in biological systems, and become a significant health hazard. Def 3.) Definition used by many - The term heavy metal refers to any metallic chemical element that has a relatively high density and is toxic, highly toxic or poisonous at low concentrations. Examples of heavy metals include mercury (Hg), cadmium (Cd), arsenic (As), chromium (Cr), thallium (Tl), and lead (Pb).
Instead of trying to confuse people with your semantics you might define your terms in a way that is scientific and at the same time relevant to people's concerns re this subject matter.